1 2025:CGHC:10446-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 781 of 2025 1. Fida Hussain S/o Ali Hussain Shah Aged About 21 Years R/o Street 07 Kavita Nagar Boriya Khurd Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2. Ahmad Hussain S/o Ali Husain Shah Aged About 23 Years R/o Street 07 Kavita Nagar Boriya Khurd Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3. Ali Hussain Shah S/o Abdul Jabbar Shah Aged About 40 Years R/o Street 07 Kavita Nagar Boriya Khurd Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer Police Station Tikrapara Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2. Mohsin Khan S/o Mustkeem Khan Aged About 26 Years R/o R.D.A. Colony Boriya Khurd Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) (Complainant) ... Respondent(s) BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2025.03.04 17:14:17 +0530 2 For Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 04.03.2025 1. Heard Mr. Jitendra Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Hariom Rai, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for respondent No. 1/State. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer: “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and quash the impugned FIR dated 29.12.2024 bearing Crime No. 1020 of 2024 registered at Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offences under Sections 109, 115(2) and 296 read with Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (Annexure P/1), in the interest of justice accordingly.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners have abused filthy languages to the complainant and also assaulted the complainant from sharp weapon in the neck of complainant, but the injuries caused in the 3 head of the complainant, therefore, the Police has registered the crime bearing No. 1020 of 2024 at Police Station Tikarapara, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2) and 296 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that prior to the alleged incident, the complainant and his companions on 27.12.2024 at about 3.30 hours when the petitioners and his sons are working in his shop, the complainant entered to the shop of petitioners and due to old enmity, has abuses filthy languages to the petitioners and also threatened to kill the petitioners and thereafter, they assaulted the petitioners from the wooden rod and bamboo, and therefore, the petitioner No. 1 received grievous injuries and admitted in the hospital. He also submits that the incident reported to the Police Station Tikarapara, Raipur and the Police has registered the crime bearing Crime No. 1016 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5) and 351(2) of the BNS. 5. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the complainant entered into the shop of petitioner and assaulted the son of petitioner and the son of the petitioner caused injuries and on the complaint of the petitioners, the Police has registered the crime as Crime No. 1019 of 2024 for the offence under Section 109, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 296 and 324(4) of the BNS registered on 28.12.2024. He would submit that as a counter blast, the present FIR bearing Crime No. 1020 of 2024 has been registered against the petitioners on the false and fabricated story made by the complainant with the help of Police person. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the respondent 4 No.2/complainant allegations are omnibus in nature with taking due advantage of process of law, hence this petition is being filed for quashment of the FIR. 7. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 8. We have perused the prayers and pleadings made in the petition along with the annexures annexed in this petition. 9. Considering the fact that the complainant/respondent No. 2 has made complaint and lodged FIR against the petitioners and similarly, the petitioners have also lodged FIR and looking to the version and counter- version of the parties with regard to the incident that is alleged to have occurred, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter and accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan